Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download

Comparison Overview

AJMC: Institute For Value Based MedicineAJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine
VS
UnitedHealth GroupUnitedHealth Group
AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine

AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine

N/A

Last Update: 01/03/2026

View Profile
762/1000Fair

The Institute for Value Based Medicine® brings together local healthcare leaders to explore real-world applications of value-based care. Each event features expert insights and regional perspectives, set in an elegant venue with gourmet dining. The atmosphere fosters me...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:None
Subsidiaries:0
12-month incidents
0
Known data breaches
0
Attack type number
0
UnitedHealth Group

UnitedHealth Group

US

Last Update: 28/06/2026

View Profile
100/1000Critical

UnitedHealth Group is a health care and well-being company with a mission to help people live healthier lives and help make the health system work better for everyone. We are 340,000 colleagues in two distinct and complementary businesses working to help build a modern...

NAICS:62
NAICS Definition:Health Care and Social Assistance
Employees:102,711
Subsidiaries:5
12-month incidents
6
Known data breaches
3
Attack type number
3

Compliance Ranges Comparison

Based On Specific Ai Models Category
AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine

AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA
UnitedHealth Group

UnitedHealth Group

-
ISO 27001Not verified
ISO 27001
-
SOC2 Type 1Not verified
SOC2 Type 1
-
SOC2 Type 2Not verified
SOC2 Type 2
-
GDPRNot verified
GDPR
-
PCI DSSNot verified
PCI DSS
-
HIPAANot verified
HIPAA

Benchmark & Cyber Underwriting Signals

Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)

No incidents recorded for AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine in 2026.

Incidents

Incidents vs Hospitals and Health Care Industry Avg (This Year)

UnitedHealth Group has 466.04% more incidents than the average of all companies with at least one recorded incident.

Incidents

Incident History - AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine (X = Date, Y = Severity)

AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

No timeline data available
R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Incident History - UnitedHealth Group (X = Date, Y = Severity)

UnitedHealth Group cyber incidents detection timeline including parent company and subsidiaries.

R - Ransomware
C - Cyber Attack
D - Data Breach
V - Vulnerability

Notable Incidents

Last Cyber / HR Incidents / Global...
AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine

AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine

Incidents
No explicit notable incidents reported.
UnitedHealth Group

UnitedHealth Group

Incidents
🔒 Incident : Cyber Attack
UNICHA1780411681
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
UNICHA1778149488
🔒 Incident : Ransomware
UNICHA1776140687

FAQ

Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine company and UnitedHealth Group company, which one has the best AI Cybersecurity Score ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine company and UnitedHealth Group company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents in the past ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine company and UnitedHealth Group company, which one has experienced more cyber incidents this year ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine company and UnitedHealth Group company, which one has experienced at least one ransomware attack ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine company and UnitedHealth Group company, which one has experienced at least one data breach ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine company and UnitedHealth Group company, which one has experienced at least one targeted cyberattack ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine company and UnitedHealth Group company, which one has experienced at least one vulnerability ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine company and UnitedHealth Group company, which one holds the most compliance certifications ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine company and UnitedHealth Group company, which one holds the fewest compliance certifications ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine company and UnitedHealth Group company, which one has the most subsidiaries ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine company and UnitedHealth Group company, which one has the largest number of employees ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine and UnitedHealth Group, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 1 certifications ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine and UnitedHealth Group, which company holds both SOC 2 Type 2 certifications ?
Which company is ISO 27001 certified - AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine or UnitedHealth Group ?
Which company is PCI DSS compliant - AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine or UnitedHealth Group ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine and UnitedHealth Group, which company complies with HIPAA regulations for healthcare data ?
Between AJMC: Institute For Value Based Medicine and UnitedHealth Group, which company complies with GDPR requirements ?

Latest Global CVEs

CVE-2026-59723
SUMMARY

Cline is an autonomous coding agent as an SDK, IDE extension, or CLI assistant. Prior to 3.0.30, the Cline Hub dashboard server launched by the cline dashboard command accepts WebSocket connections on the /browser endpoint without validating the Origin header, and when ROOM_SECRET is unset for local 127.0.0.1 binds, isAuthorizedBrowserRequest() allows attacker-controlled websites to send desktopCommand frames that read workspace state, mutate MCP and provider settings, and trigger command execution when a provider or model is configured. This issue is fixed in version 3.0.30.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 8.8)
CVSS3
Base Score: 8.8
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:A/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:H
IMPACT SCORE
6
EXPLOITABILITY
2.1
CVE-2026-54784
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. In version 1.9.0, CoreWCF SPNEGO SecurityContextToken negotiation can expose the proof key recovered from the RSTR when TransportWithMessageCredential with Windows client credentials and session establishment are used, allowing an observer to impersonate the authenticated Windows principal and decrypt or forge WS-SecureConversation traffic. This issue is fixed in version 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54783
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF WS-Security endorsing and supporting signature verification does not ensure the selected ds:Signature covers the expected Security header target, allowing an attacker with one captured signed SOAP envelope to replay arbitrary service operations as the victim principal. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2
CVE-2026-54782
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML 1.1 and SAML 2.0 token validation does not correctly resolve the issuer signing key or require signed tokens when IdentityConfiguration is used with federated bindings, allowing an unauthenticated remote attacker to impersonate any principal the trusted STS could issue. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 10)
CVSS3
Base Score: 10.0
Complexity: LOW
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:C/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.8
EXPLOITABILITY
3.9
CVE-2026-54781
SUMMARY

CoreWCF is a port of the service side of Windows Communication Foundation (WCF) to .NET Core. Prior to 1.8.1 and 1.9.1, CoreWCF SAML token validation does not enforce SubjectConfirmation method URIs or holder-of-key proof keys in SamlSecurityTokenHandler, allowing holder-of-key downgrade or custom confirmation method assertions to authenticate a subject without proving authority over the assertion. This issue is fixed in versions 1.8.1 and 1.9.1.

PUBLISHED
Date2026-07-08
UPDATED
Date2026-07-08
RISK INFORMATION (Score: 7.4)
CVSS3
Base Score: 7.4
Complexity: HIGH
CVSS:3.1/AV:N/AC:H/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:N
IMPACT SCORE
5.2
EXPLOITABILITY
2.2